Anyone that has paid any amount of attention to the Marco Rubio / Charlie Crist race for the Republican Gubanatorial race in Florida over the past few months had to see this one coming. With Rubio pounding Crist in polls and fundraising, Crist announced that he will run as an Independent. I guess this is Crist's answer to what job or career he will consider after he loses in the primary: He has no idea.
Who wouldn't love to be a state level politician (some days)? Great benefits and free travel across your state are two good reasons. And just about how everyone thinks your important. Everyone needs something from you. But then there are the drawbacks. You have to fight for your job every two to four years. For 11 months of your last year in office, you spend more time campaigning that actually doing the job you were voted to do. Every little mispoken word or every line that could be taken out of context is taken out of context and you spend two weeks doing job-saving crisis prevention. But hey, if being a politician is something you really want to do, then go for it.
But, please keep these things in mind, because it seems that Mr. Crist has forgotten them.
1. You are elected. One day, one year, one election, you will lose. It's inevetible. Unless you are caught doing something really stupid, like, say, cheating on your wife with a call-girl or you have an Argentinian mistress. Then of course, you will be asked to leave office before the election. And politicians hate that.
2. This is not a career. I wish that every politically affiliated post in every state had term limits, but alas, they do not. When you begin feeling that the citizenry does not want you in office, but you have done a fairly good job by them, take that as a sign to leave office with your dignity intact. Right now, Crist is losing to Rubio by about 20 points in polls (here), although Rasmussen has Rubio leading a 3-way race by 7 points. When you feel yourself about to get voted out of office, leave gracefully. Maybe in 20 years, they'll name a school or library after you. If you keep trying to hold on to your job like the Japanese fighting for Iwo Jima, then people start to think of you as a big jerk that won't go away. I call it "I don't know what else to do syndrome." They have spent their whole life climbing the political peak, and they have reached the summit, and they don't want to go back down. It's similar to squatter's rights, "I've been here for so long, it's mine, and I ain't givin' it up."
With either candidate holding sizeable leads over Democratic candidate Meek, the GOP primary is the big race. Crist has been battling up hill for quite some time, and it's sad to see him continuing to cling to his job, despite the writing on the wall.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Senator Carl Levin and his rated R tirade
Dear Senator Carl Levin:
I hope you enjoyed your 15 minutes. As an elected official for the state of Michigan, you carried yourself in a totally unprofessional way in your interrogation of Goldman Sachs executives. Granted, I know you were reading verbatim their inter-office emails. But you didn't have to. You could have self-censored. But you chose a different route. Shock and awe, right? Your little tirade wouldn't have made it on PBS or C-SPAN, two public broadcast networks. Radio and TV networks had to censor the tape before it was aired. Is that really something you want to be remembered for?
There are plenty of other ways for you to make your point. And for the record, I think Goldman Sachs probably participated in practices that ended up hurting their clients. If you really wanted to get to the bottom of the well, it is not productive to berate someone with silly questions that you simply want answered like this, "Yep, we lied, lied, and lied some more. And we made millions along the way."
Even in a court of law, a judge would have asked you to tone down the language. But no, in the highest level of government, you had to use language that would have gotten a middle schooler kicked out of school. I hope you feel good about yourself this morning. And for your sake, I hope emails from you with derogatory language do not get leaked out. After all, they are kept on government servers.
Sincerely,
The Conservative Rocker
I hope you enjoyed your 15 minutes. As an elected official for the state of Michigan, you carried yourself in a totally unprofessional way in your interrogation of Goldman Sachs executives. Granted, I know you were reading verbatim their inter-office emails. But you didn't have to. You could have self-censored. But you chose a different route. Shock and awe, right? Your little tirade wouldn't have made it on PBS or C-SPAN, two public broadcast networks. Radio and TV networks had to censor the tape before it was aired. Is that really something you want to be remembered for?
There are plenty of other ways for you to make your point. And for the record, I think Goldman Sachs probably participated in practices that ended up hurting their clients. If you really wanted to get to the bottom of the well, it is not productive to berate someone with silly questions that you simply want answered like this, "Yep, we lied, lied, and lied some more. And we made millions along the way."
Even in a court of law, a judge would have asked you to tone down the language. But no, in the highest level of government, you had to use language that would have gotten a middle schooler kicked out of school. I hope you feel good about yourself this morning. And for your sake, I hope emails from you with derogatory language do not get leaked out. After all, they are kept on government servers.
Sincerely,
The Conservative Rocker
Monday, April 26, 2010
Race politics, and NC Senate District 3
In the race for Democratic Primary for NC Senate District 3, there are some interesting developments. Clark Jenkins is the incumbent, and is a white farmer. He may call himself a businessman. But he’s a farmer. The other lead candidate is Frankie Bourdeaux, a black businessman. He and his wife own a mental health clinic. I heard on the radio this morning Mr. Bourdeaux is putting out a robo-call asking black Democrats to turn out in good numbers for the Democratic primary in May. This should be embarrassing for the Democratic Party. Basically, it’s the “help a brotha out” mentality.
If Bourdeaux really wants to win the election for valid reasons, he needs to get his message out to the voters and not ask black people to vote for the black candidate. Local Democratic leaders need to call Bourdeaux to the carpet on this. I’m not supporting either candidate, but I imagine there would be quite a controversy if people opposed to Bourdeaux basically accused him of winning only because of his skin color. And it would not even be that far-fetched of an argument considering this new bit of information.
And if you do not think anything is wrong with this, what do you think would happen if Clark Jenkins asked all the white people to vote for him? He would not even be allowed to come back home. He would not have to worry about the local media. The national media would be camped outside his home. It is still racism, no matter how you color it. Racism is the same either way, and Mr. Bourdeaux should be ashamed of himself.
Even Mr. Bourdeaux's wife has made similar statements. The Rocky Mount Telegram quoted her, At the end of his remarks, Bordeaux’s wife, Faye, asked the crowd to consider her husband’s background, race and affinity for the residents of District 3 before they go to vote.
“This is a 58 percent minority district,” Faye Bordeaux said. “Why can’t we have someone in that seat who is qualified to do the job and who also looks and sounds like the people he represents?”
What she failed to bring up is how this is a 58% minority district. The district includes Martin, Edgecombe, and parts of Pitt, Bertie, Tyrrell, and Washington counties. The district lines are drawn up to elect a black person. Instead of giving the most populated county in the east (Pitt) it's own senate representative, the county is divided up, giving parts of it to district 3, and parts to district 5. Even the racial breakdown of the counties doesn't equal 58%. Pitt county is only 33% black; Martin is 45%; Edgecombe is 57%; Washington is 49%; Tyrrell is 39%; Bertie is 62%.
The Bourdeaux's should think about why they are running for office, and should plan on representing everyone in their district if elected, not just black people.
If Bourdeaux really wants to win the election for valid reasons, he needs to get his message out to the voters and not ask black people to vote for the black candidate. Local Democratic leaders need to call Bourdeaux to the carpet on this. I’m not supporting either candidate, but I imagine there would be quite a controversy if people opposed to Bourdeaux basically accused him of winning only because of his skin color. And it would not even be that far-fetched of an argument considering this new bit of information.
And if you do not think anything is wrong with this, what do you think would happen if Clark Jenkins asked all the white people to vote for him? He would not even be allowed to come back home. He would not have to worry about the local media. The national media would be camped outside his home. It is still racism, no matter how you color it. Racism is the same either way, and Mr. Bourdeaux should be ashamed of himself.
Even Mr. Bourdeaux's wife has made similar statements. The Rocky Mount Telegram quoted her, At the end of his remarks, Bordeaux’s wife, Faye, asked the crowd to consider her husband’s background, race and affinity for the residents of District 3 before they go to vote.
“This is a 58 percent minority district,” Faye Bordeaux said. “Why can’t we have someone in that seat who is qualified to do the job and who also looks and sounds like the people he represents?”
What she failed to bring up is how this is a 58% minority district. The district includes Martin, Edgecombe, and parts of Pitt, Bertie, Tyrrell, and Washington counties. The district lines are drawn up to elect a black person. Instead of giving the most populated county in the east (Pitt) it's own senate representative, the county is divided up, giving parts of it to district 3, and parts to district 5. Even the racial breakdown of the counties doesn't equal 58%. Pitt county is only 33% black; Martin is 45%; Edgecombe is 57%; Washington is 49%; Tyrrell is 39%; Bertie is 62%.
The Bourdeaux's should think about why they are running for office, and should plan on representing everyone in their district if elected, not just black people.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Obama takes on state's rights
With the immigration law passed in Arizona, President Obama felt the need to weight in on this issue. Basically, the new law states that it is acceptable for law enforcement to question the citizenship of anyone they believe may be here illegally. In a border state that is being threatened with more and more violence from Mexican gangs, it's no wonder the Arizona Assembly passed such a measure. Of course, this will be sent to the Arizona State Supreme Court for review, not the Federal courts. And that's why President Obama needs to tread lightly.
I completely understand that immigration, illegal or legal, is something that should be handled on the federal level. But under the current circumstances, it is the responsibility of state leaders to protect it's own part of the border and its citizens.
The violence in southern Arizona has been worsening, and the furor climaxed with the murder of a rancher by an illegal alien in March, 2010. Mexican drug cartels have been increasingly pushing into the southern border states, and also bringing the violence with them. And the only immigration stance the White House has basically says "sorry for keeping you in the shadows. Learn English, pay a fine, and happy travels in the U.S." It's not a policy, it's an open door. If the national government's answer to illegal immigrant violence in southern border states is to continue to discuss how to strengthen the border, and think about putting national guard troops on border patrol, then the state's have an obligation to protect it's citizens.
There is a legal way to emigrate to the United States. If the federal government does not want to enforce its own policies, then states and local governments should enforce policies it believes are warranted and necessary.
I completely understand that immigration, illegal or legal, is something that should be handled on the federal level. But under the current circumstances, it is the responsibility of state leaders to protect it's own part of the border and its citizens.
The violence in southern Arizona has been worsening, and the furor climaxed with the murder of a rancher by an illegal alien in March, 2010. Mexican drug cartels have been increasingly pushing into the southern border states, and also bringing the violence with them. And the only immigration stance the White House has basically says "sorry for keeping you in the shadows. Learn English, pay a fine, and happy travels in the U.S." It's not a policy, it's an open door. If the national government's answer to illegal immigrant violence in southern border states is to continue to discuss how to strengthen the border, and think about putting national guard troops on border patrol, then the state's have an obligation to protect it's citizens.
There is a legal way to emigrate to the United States. If the federal government does not want to enforce its own policies, then states and local governments should enforce policies it believes are warranted and necessary.
Friday, April 23, 2010
The Beatles once came to Shea Stadium, too
A friend of mine from high school posted on her facebook status:
"is excited Obama is coming to Asheville today! I work near Grove Park Inn....what if I see him!!"
Hey, it's great that someone can be excited about seeing the President. But did you ever see anyone get so flustered about seeing either George Bush or Bill Clinton? Ok, just the Bushes? It's hero worship to a disturbing degree. If Obama gets elected out in 2012, would I be considered a racist for saying, "finally, a white president." Yes, and I should be. But is it just as equal to say that about someone who says, "finally, a black president?"GM's big scam
I'm sure a lot of people have heard about how the administration was all excited about announcing GM had repaid their loan. As Mike Myer's Scottish Guy character on Saturday Night Live used to say, "It's crap!"
GM received a lump sum of money from taxpayers, and stored some in a separate account than that of its general operating expenses. With the separate money, the re-payed the original loan. I'm assuming that the loan repayment also included some funds from profit.
It's disgusting and an affront to every citizen in this country. GM even started running television ads stating they had re-payed the loan. What a lie! If the Obama administration was worried about transparency and accountability, this would be a great launching point for such an initiative.
GM should be required to repay whatever amount they used from the original bailout loan, with interest. I would even go as far to say GM would no longer be eligible for any type of government assistance.
Some people think this is a reason for more government oversight. No. If the government had never given Gimpy Motors bailout money in the first place, they would have done exactly what businesses are allowed to do of their own free will. Shape up, or ship out. Now, we're faced with a shady corporate entity that was only allowed to survive through government intervention.
GM received a lump sum of money from taxpayers, and stored some in a separate account than that of its general operating expenses. With the separate money, the re-payed the original loan. I'm assuming that the loan repayment also included some funds from profit.
It's disgusting and an affront to every citizen in this country. GM even started running television ads stating they had re-payed the loan. What a lie! If the Obama administration was worried about transparency and accountability, this would be a great launching point for such an initiative.
GM should be required to repay whatever amount they used from the original bailout loan, with interest. I would even go as far to say GM would no longer be eligible for any type of government assistance.
Some people think this is a reason for more government oversight. No. If the government had never given Gimpy Motors bailout money in the first place, they would have done exactly what businesses are allowed to do of their own free will. Shape up, or ship out. Now, we're faced with a shady corporate entity that was only allowed to survive through government intervention.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Obama setting sights on Supreme Court
President Obama will have the chance to pick a new Supreme Court Justice later this summer as Justice Stevens departs the bench. While many people will say this or that person should be appointed, it is ultimately up to Obama to name a successor. He has already hinted at things that will help shape his decision.
The big thing Obama has already hinted at is pro-women's rights. While he said that is not necessarily "pro-choice" it might as well be. Part of the reasoning for that is "the notion that individuals are protected in their privacy and their bodily integrity, and women are not exempt from that." Well, that is a pretty broad statement. I can not see too many people disagreeing with that. It's a middle path statement. Unfortunately, it is so broad, it almost sounds Libertarian. If "bodily privacy" should be given, then lots of other things should be legal as well. If I want to ingest three pounds of crack everyday, who should stop me? It is my body after all. And let's legalize prostitution. It's a female's body and she should be able to do with it as she pleases.
I'm not endorsing any of those views at all. And I know the Supreme Court nominee is going to go through the gauntlet as far as Senate confirmation is concerned. But if the President is going to outline views that he wants associated with his nominee, then he just needs to come out and say it. Don't beat around the bush. If he wants a pro-choice nominee, then he should say that, and not use such general terms that it can mean anything. If he is truly concerned about private rights, then he should also keep in mind that we should not take away rights from those that have no choice.
The big thing Obama has already hinted at is pro-women's rights. While he said that is not necessarily "pro-choice" it might as well be. Part of the reasoning for that is "the notion that individuals are protected in their privacy and their bodily integrity, and women are not exempt from that." Well, that is a pretty broad statement. I can not see too many people disagreeing with that. It's a middle path statement. Unfortunately, it is so broad, it almost sounds Libertarian. If "bodily privacy" should be given, then lots of other things should be legal as well. If I want to ingest three pounds of crack everyday, who should stop me? It is my body after all. And let's legalize prostitution. It's a female's body and she should be able to do with it as she pleases.
I'm not endorsing any of those views at all. And I know the Supreme Court nominee is going to go through the gauntlet as far as Senate confirmation is concerned. But if the President is going to outline views that he wants associated with his nominee, then he just needs to come out and say it. Don't beat around the bush. If he wants a pro-choice nominee, then he should say that, and not use such general terms that it can mean anything. If he is truly concerned about private rights, then he should also keep in mind that we should not take away rights from those that have no choice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
